“The House Armed Services Committee has joined with the Foreign Affairs Committee today to further our exploration of Iraq policy.  For the members of the Armed Services Committee, this is the second of four hearings on the subject.  I would like to thank Chairman Lantos for taking the lead on this hearing, and the witnesses for agreeing to appear.  It’s wonderful to see a panel of old friends with us today.  Gentlemen, thank you for your testimony and for your service.

    “Our committees are trying to get a clear picture of where U.S. policy stands in Iraq and what the path forward should be.  The testimony provided by GAO yesterday made clear that despite the valiant efforts of our military serving in Iraq, the Iraqi government has not taken advantage of this opportunity to move toward true national reconciliation.  It is not clear to me that this reality will change in the coming months. I suspect General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker will have insight on this question next week, but I would appreciate the witnesses’ thoughts on the prospects for political progress in Iraq.

    “Beyond this issue, I am struck by the fact that all three of our witnesses have experience leading the United States military and dealing with the strategic challenges posed in managing our force.  One of my primary concerns in considering the right way forward for our involvement in Iraq is the impact of this effort on the overall readiness of our forces—particularly the ground forces.  I am concerned that the current deployment schedules and overall strain on those serving pose strategic risk both now and in the future.

    “We currently have over 160 thousand US troops in Iraq patrolling the streets and fighting and dying on behalf of Iraqis.  I cannot tell you how much I, and I am sure every member here, appreciates their sacrifice.  They are the best we have, and we simply cannot thank them enough.  But to the extent that they are in Iraq, they are not free to carry out other missions.  Those troops who are in Iraq are not in Afghanistan, pursuing the Al Qaeda who attacked us on September 11th. 

    “Looking ahead, we know that we cannot see around corners.  The threats and miscalculations of tomorrow are not necessarily clear to us today.  In my 30 years in Congress, we have been involved in 12 contingencies—most of which were not foreseen. I am deeply concerned that our military will not be adequately prepared to prevail in the next conflict.

    “So my questions are these. First, what impact does the war in Iraq have on our long-term struggle against those elements of al Qaeda that are focused on attacking the American people and the homeland—particularly on our effort to ensure Afghanistan and Pakistan are not terrorist safe havens?   It was widely reported a few years ago that Special Forces troops were pulled out of Afghanistan and sent to Iraq.  We continue to make the same sort of choice today when we send 100 thousand more troops to Iraq and many fewer in pursuit of Osama bin Laden and other key members of al Qaeda.  Does this sort of prioritization serve our national interests?

    “Second and more generally, what considerations must be made in our Iraq policy to ensure the long-term readiness of our military—particularly our ground forces?

    “I hope the witnesses can take a moment to address these points.

    “I would like to again thank Chairman Lantos and our witnesses.”

###